Spotlights, Floodlights, and the Magic Number Zero: Simple Effects Tests in Moderated Regression

Stephen A. Spiller; Gavan J. Fitzsimons; John G. Lynch; Gary H. McClelland

doi:10.1509/jmr.12.0420

Spotlights, Floodlights, and the Magic Number Zero: Simple Effects Tests in Moderated Regression

Stephen A. Spiller¹; Gavan J. Fitzsimons²; John G. Lynch³; Gary H. McClelland⁴

¹ Assistant Professor of Marketing, Anderson School of Management, University of California, Los Angeles · ² R. David Thomas Professor of Marketing and Psychology, Fuqua School of Business, Duke University · ³ Ted Anderson Professor, Leeds School of Business, and Director, Center for Research on Consumers’ Financial Decision Making, University of Colorado Boulder · ⁴ Professor of Psychology and Faculty Fellow, Institute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado Boulder

Journal of Marketing Research 2013

It is common for researchers discovering a significant interaction of a measured variable X with a manipulated variable Z to examine simple effects of Z at different levels of X. These “spotlight” tests are often misunderstood even in the simplest cases, and it appears that consumer researchers are unsure how to extend them to more complex designs. The authors explain the general principles of spotlight tests, show that they rely on familiar regression techniques, and provide a tutorial demonstrating how to apply these tests across an array of experimental designs. Rather than following the common practice of reporting spotlight tests at one standard deviation above and below the mean of X, it is recommended that when X has focal values, researchers should report spotlight tests at those focal values. When X does not have focal values, it is recommended that researchers report ranges of significance using a version of Johnson and Neyman's test the authors term a “floodlight.”

DOI: 10.1509/jmr.12.0420
Volume: 50 (2)
Pages: 277-288
Language: en
Export: BibTeX
Sources: crossref